Governance Structure Proposal for Ubuntu-AU

[Andre Mangan]

On 8 March 2010 15:01, Matthew Rossi <matt at pcpodcast.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I agree with what Scott is saying.  It would be a good idea to be flagging
> those contributing to this thread as those with a vested interest in the
> LoCo, and that we need to work out overall what our LoCo is trying to
> achieve.
>
> Going back to the talk about the Governance structure, we have about three
> different systems going around.
>
> We have the present system, which isn't working too well.  I don't need to
> repeat why because it has already been covered.
>
> We have my system, which would struggle to organise events and liaise with
> local LUGs in states that do not have representation on the committee.
>  There are also issues regarding election processes and the idea of newer
> members attaining committee spots being out of reach that need to be looked
> at.
>
> We have the state rep system.  It works well if there are active reps from
> each state within the LoCo.  Elections would never work for that model as
> the numbers of people in each state are too small, so how do we select reps?
>  And how do we encourage newer members to get involved as a state rep?  If
> the process isn't rigid and doesn't allow for regular change, then it
> becomes too hard for newer members.  There is also a chance that we can't
> get state reps for various states, which means that liaising with LUGs and
> organising events there would become too difficult.
>
> So, keeping that in mind, let me pose this question, which way do we go?
>  We need to have a rigid and transparent structure of governance because it
> is obvious that without one we as a LoCo are going to struggle to get things
> done.
> --
> Regards,
> Matthew Rossi
> matt at pcpodcast.org
>
> Tel: +1 253 987 6413
> Mob: +61 488 122 990
>
> --
> ubuntu-au mailing list
> ubuntu-au at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-au
>
>

Perhaps State representation is not necessary where Time Zone representation
would suffice.  Australia has a land mass of about 7.7 million square
kilometers with three time zones - four actually when you consider the areas
that follow or do not follow daylight saving.  Looking at Melissa's
marvelous time election chart, I can see that the same mistake is being
repeated where the members from the eastern states sway the balance of the
votes towards a particular meeting time.  When the eastern states meet at 9
p.m. it is 6 p.m. in Perth.  Vice versa the picture becomes even more
unpalatable.

Personally I would prefer meetings to be held on a weekend day in daylight
hours.  Living in rural NSW I am unable to attend meetings at LUGs nor
Release Gatherings.

Currently, meetings are conducted via IRC.  Is that really the best that
21st century technology can provide?

I am a member of a mutual interest club which consists of volunteers.  That
there are always the regular few that carry the load is a universal
problem.  Meetings are organised via telephone link-up which costs less than
$20 and participants are billed for a local call.  Yes, there is a
constitution and job description and I agree with Matthew Rossi about the
need for a governance structure.

Ubuntu is free software but if we want to promote it we have to be prepared
to pay.

Cheers,
Andre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-au/attachments/20100308/09e6ccf4/attachment-0001.htm